Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
HOMEBREW Digest #3040
HOMEBREW Digest #3040 Wed 26 May 1999
FORUM ON BEER, HOMEBREWING, AND RELATED ISSUES
Digest Janitor: janitor@hbd.org
Many thanks to the Observer & Eccentric Newspapers of
Livonia, Michigan for sponsoring the Homebrew Digest.
URL: http://www.oeonline.com
Contents:
Sodium Propionate source needed (Rick Olivo)
re: EM3 (Jack Schmidling)
finding sankey kegs (J Daoust)
the Rennerian spatio-temporal manifold (Scott Murman)
malty .../Munich/Maltbeer ("Stephen Alexander")
malt liquor? ("Thomas D. Hamann")
Seibel: Well attenuated high etoh beer ("John Robinson")
Flowmeters ("John Robinson")
sour cherries (Jim Liddil)
Yet another Siebel Question ("John Robinson")
RE:ale yeast for fake lagers? (Zurekbrau)
New House Basement Brewery Ideas ("Carmen J. Salvatore")
Carboys are dangerous... (larson.jt)
Fermentation temperature (Ian Smith)
Aluminum / Green Beer ("Peter J. Calinski")
Re: ale yeast for fake lagers? (Spencer W Thomas)
Siebel answer to loren crow on mash duration (Radzan1000)
Siebel answer for don cole on hot side aeration (Radzan1000)
malt flavor ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
Siebel Qs ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
Blind to Diacetyl ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
answer to Mike Kauffman RE brewing careers question (BillSiebel)
Flavor Courses @ Siebel ("WILLIAM R. SIEBEL")
Siebel answer to dan listermann - subject: foam (Radzan1000)
Siebel answer to dan cole - subect aluminum (Radzan1000)
autolysis/squirrels ("Stephen Alexander")
Gump Gone ? ("Jeffrey M. Kenton")
re: malty flavour ("Dr. Pivo")
Primary vs. Secondary Experiment (Matthew Comstock)
malty and/or diacetyl flavor from yeast ("Andrew D. Kligerman")
Siebel: Yeast Questions ("Stephen Alexander")
Siebel answer to dr. pivo - subject: yeast respiration (Radzan1000)
Beer is our obsession and we're late for therapy!
2000 MCAB Qualifiers: Boneyard Brew-Off 6/12/99
(http://www.uiuc.edu/ro/BUZZ/contest5.html); Buzz-Off!
Competition 6/26/99 (http://www.voicenet.com/~rpmattie/buzzoff)
Send articles for __publication_only__ to post@hbd.org
If your e-mail account is being deleted, please unsubscribe first!!
To SUBSCRIBE or UNSUBSCRIBE send an e-mail message with the word
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to request@hbd.org.
**SUBSCRIBE AND UNSUBSCRIBE REQUESTS MUST BE SENT FROM THE E-MAIL
ACCOUNT YOU WISH TO HAVE SUBSCRIBED OR UNSUBSCRIBED!!!**
IF YOU HAVE SPAM-PROOFED your e-mail address, the autoresponder and
the SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE commands will fail!
Contact brewery@hbd.org for information regarding the "Cat's Meow"
Back issues are available via:
HTML from...
http://hbd.org
Anonymous ftp from...
ftp://hbd.org/pub/hbd/digests
ftp://ftp.stanford.edu/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
AFS users can find it under...
/afs/ir.stanford.edu/ftp/pub/clubs/homebrew/beer
COPYRIGHT for the Digest as a collection is currently held by hbd.org
(Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen). Digests in their entirity CANNOT be
reprinted/reproduced without this entire header section unless
EXPRESS written permission has been obtained from hbd.org. Digests
CANNOT be reprinted or reproduced in any format for redistribution
unless said redistribution is at absolutely NO COST to the consumer.
COPYRIGHT for individual posts within each Digest is held by the
author. Articles cannot be extracted from the Digest and
reprinted/reproduced without the EXPRESS written permission of the
author. The author and HBD must be attributed as author and source in
any such reprint/reproduction. (Note: QUOTING of items originally
appearing in the Digest in a subsequent Digest is exempt from the
above. Home brew clubs NOT associated with organizations having a
commercial interest in beer or brewing may republish articles in their
newsletters and/or websites provided that the author and HBD are
attributed. ASKING first is still a great courtesy...)
JANITORS on duty: Pat Babcock and Karl Lutzen (janitor@hbd.org)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:38:41 -0500
From: Rick Olivo <strangebrewer@ashland.baysat.net>
Subject: Sodium Propionate source needed
Greetings Beer sippers, guzzlers and quaffers of all stripes:
I am operating a yeast ranch for myself and friends at Skotrat's Brew Rat
Chat. So far it has been a sucessful idea, but I have been having an
unacceptably large number of cultures that are showing up with mold
contaminations. Clearly this is a result of having my yeast lab down in the
basement where mold is an inescapable fact of life despite my use of a
laminar air flow hood with HEPA filtering. I intend to take stern measures
to cut back on the presence of ambient mold spores in the air; I've just
installed a room air cleaner. The walls are going to be stripped and
repainted and I will be sealing off the ceiling and repainting the floor.
In the meantime, I understand from the Yeast FAQ that Pierre Jelenc
suggests that a .4 to 1% solution of sodium propionate "will supress
practically all molds without affecting the growth or viability of yeasts."
Now my question is this: Does anyone in this all-knowing collective have
any idea where i may obtain a small supply of this marvelous substance so
efficient, yet so benign? I do know that it is FDA approved for the
prevention of moldes on foodstuffs, so I see no reason why it couldn't be
used on the Malt/Agar-Agar I am using to culture my yeasts. Any hints for
sources would be greatly appreciated.
Rick Olivo
aka "The Strange Brewer"
Head Yeast Wrangler
Brew Rat Chat Yeast Ranch
strangebrewer@ashland.baysat.net
Vitae Sine Cervesiae Sugat!!!
("Life Without Beer Sucks!!!")
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 21:53:42 -0700
From: Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>
Subject: re: EM3
Stephen Alexander wrote:
"What's the intended audience? It sounds too big for
a 16" diameter 15.5gal sanke....
It's the same length as the EM2 so that's not a problem. However,
the question is a good one and the answer is: the audience is all
the folks who have asked me for such a screen over the years but
I fully expect them all to vanish now that I did it.
And for the record..... I apologize for including the price in the
posting as this sort of pushes it beyond netequitte.
js
Visit our web site: http://user.mc.net/arf
ASTROPHOTO OF THE WEEK: http://user.mc.net/arf/weekly.htm
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 21:47:36 -0700
From: J Daoust <thedaousts@ixpres.com>
Subject: finding sankey kegs
if anyone out there is looking for a keg to use in their home brewery,
check out your local mom & pop keg beer store. I got one from a store
like this for 15 bucks. and the keg was in premium condition. yours in
addictive brewing, Jerry Daoust
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 23:26:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: Scott Murman <smurman@best.com>
Subject: the Rennerian spatio-temporal manifold
> Jason Henning
> Big Red Alchemy and Brewing
> Clawson, MI - I'm going to be (0,0) Rennerian Tuesday or Wednesday night
This kind of sloppiness cannot be tolerated. There's no way you can
prescribe your Rennerian location using two coordinates. Even
assuming a mapping onto the surface of the earth, altitude differences
must still be accounted for. Of course there's also time ("he was
here a minute ago"). Then there's the whole Garvin Theory of Strange
Attractors...
-SM- ehh, left
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 05:11:35 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: malty .../Munich/Maltbeer
Kyle says,
>I have a special talent where I can simultaneously differentiate between
>multiple flavors within the same bite. Call it an ambidexterous
pallette...
The nose and tongue sense all the flavors together and you can only factor
them out by knowing from experience what the individual components are
*likely* to be, and what they taste like individually. It requires a
tremendous amount of experience to tease apart even modestly complex flavor
combinations and it's very very error prone. If it's so easy to decompose
flavors why were KFC & CocaCola formulations secrets for decades ? I'd be
willing to wager a significant sum that Kyle, like most brewers, even tho'
quite familiar with components hops flavors, cannot reliably identify hops
used two or three at a time in beer. Even such a simple decomposition is
really quite difficult.
>I don't seek a 'slap in the face' malt flavor, but the subtle flavor of
malty
>sweetness than can often be found in German lagers (this flavor is not
nutty,
>or like fresh baked bread either, and it doesn't smell like a bag of malt).
To set the record straight there are nutty component aromas in all kilned
malts [JIB v98, pp215 for the technocrats], and I didn't say that malt
smells like bread I only compared the desirability of the aromas.
>I don't seek [...], but the subtle flavor of malty
>sweetness [...] , and it doesn't smell like a bag of malt).
You want malty flavor, but not the sort of flavor found in a bag of malt.
You state a contradiction to my way of thinking. "Malty" *IS* the flavor
and aroma of malt - not of some other substitute. Kyle - honestly,
sincerely, no antagonism meant - if you're not getting a malty flavor from a
malt sack then you have a very fundamental problem. There are only a few
possibilities - defective malts, an inadequate selection, a defective
nose/tongue or a confusion about what maltiness is. You'll have to figure
it out for yourself.
Since you reject what I write, and also fail to mention what style of
Bavarian beer you seek to brew, may I suggest you get a copy of Kunze and
follow the malt bill guidelines for your chosen style there (pp 164) using
good quality continental malts. You will probably find some surprises there
in terms of the amounts and types of malt used in various styles (most HBers
would). The table is adapted from one by Narziss of Wehenstephan; so you
can consider it authoritative for modern German commercial brewing practice.
The oxidation you mention may certainly hide or damage malt flavors, but
seems unlikely to be very apparent early in the beers life and it would
likely show up in other more conventional ways too. I have had beers go
"dumb" (become relatively flavorless) due to apparent oxidation damage, but
other symptoms quickly followed.
>Thanks for skipping the chemical diagrams.
Witty sarcasm is clearly your long suite Kyle, try hunting about for the
page-down key sometime.
===
Munich Malts responses re Weyermann were all rave, Weissheimer also got
two positive comments. Weyermann is no longer distributed by L.D.Carlson;
Crosby&Baker(?) is the sole US distributor which explains the relative
difficulty in obtaining Weyermann in my part of the planet. - thanks all.
===
Someone asked about a low alcohol maltbeer.- Kunze doesn't provide a grain
bill, but suggests that brumalt(bruhmalt) replaces the munich and caramel in
these beers. Another hard to find and pricey malt type.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 20:47:49 +0930
From: "Thomas D. Hamann" <tdhamann@senet.com.au>
Subject: malt liquor?
Have just drunk a funny shaped screw top bottle
of "Mickey's Malt Liquor", what is it? We don't
use that terminology in Australia and Michael
Jackson says its not malty and it aint liquor
and contains lots of cheap sugar. The bottle
also doesn't tell me how much zumba it contains,
how alco. are these beers?
tdh
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:51:42 -0300
From: "John Robinson" <robinson@novalistech.com>
Subject: Seibel: Well attenuated high etoh beer
Hi,
I'm looking to make a nice, well attenuated belgian tripple. I
measured the specific gravity of one of my favorite examples of this
style (La Fin du Monde) and discovered it finished at about 1.004!
What sort of a mash temperature profile would you recomend to
create a beer with 9% ABV that finishes at about 1.004?
Obviously, one wants the temperature in the low 140s, but I want to
know how long you think it would take and what other mash temps
you would recomend. Thanks.
- ---
John Robinson "The most basic rule of survival in any situation is:
Technical Architect Never look like food." - Park Ranger.
NovaLIS Technologies
robinson@novalistech.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:58:06 -0300
From: "John Robinson" <robinson@novalistech.com>
Subject: Flowmeters
Hi,
Can anyone out there recomend a flow meter that is suitable for
homebrewing use? Prices and suppliers welcome.
- ---
John Robinson "The most basic rule of survival in any situation is:
Technical Architect Never look like food." - Park Ranger.
NovaLIS Technologies
robinson@novalistech.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:02:33 -0400
From: Jim Liddil <jliddil@vms.arizona.edu>
Subject: sour cherries
A couple of years ago I looked into sour cherries quite extensively. One
of the few experts left in the US is Dr. Iezzoni.
(www.hrt.msu.edu/faculty/main_Iezzoni.htm). Since moving to CT I have
looked into this more. Brown rot is a problem here and sour varieties are
somewhat less suseptible. She recommended two varieties but I can not find
the notes right now. Hilltop has a number of varieties including the ones
she mentioned (hilltop.com)
Jim
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:12:44 -0300
From: "John Robinson" <robinson@novalistech.com>
Subject: Yet another Siebel Question
Hi again!
I'm going to try an think of these all at once in the future, but I have
another question for you folks.
A while back a friend of mine conducted a cold-sparge experiment.
That is, rather than heat the sparge water up to 168, he sparged
with cold tap water.
He experienced no measurable loss of extract. He and I concluded
from this that the only really good reason to sparge with hot water
was to boost the temperature of the wort on exit from the lauter
tun, and thus reduce the amount of heat needed to bring it to a
boil.
Can you comment on the advantages/disadvantages of a cold
sparge with regards to a) tannins, b) extraction, c) energy
management and d) any other germaine points.
Thanks.
- ---
John Robinson "The most basic rule of survival in any situation is:
Technical Architect Never look like food." - Park Ranger.
NovaLIS Technologies
robinson@novalistech.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:28:02 EDT
From: Zurekbrau@aol.com
Subject: RE:ale yeast for fake lagers?
Bryan Gros writes:
>Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable lager tasting
>beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so?
My favorite ale yeast for fake lagers is Wyeast #1007 German ale yeast. It
does not add much ale flavors when fermented in the 60 degrees F.
Rich Zurek
Carpentersville IL USA
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:06:34 -0400
From: "Carmen J. Salvatore" <carmen.salvatore@lmco.com>
Subject: New House Basement Brewery Ideas
Hi All,
I'll soon be in the process of building a new home. Plans
will call for a brewery in the basement. I'd like to collect
ideas/opinions from others who also brew in thier basements.
Specificaally I'm looking for information about venting and
providing air during the boil as well as room construction
details. For example it would seem to me that there may be
quite a bit of moisture during the boil - similar to a
bathroom during a shower - would it be advisable to use the
water resistant sheet rock (Green Board) or is that
overkill. What other room treatments would be recommended?
Since this will be new construction, and I have spousal
support, I can do this from the gound up. I expect to brew 5
gal batches - I know many will say that I should be set up
for larger batches - but we tend to like variety and find
the brewing process very enjoyable and therefore don't mind
the more frequent brew sessions. I seem to remember that Al
K. went through this a while ago but I was unable to did up
anything in the archives.
Thanks for any input,
Carm Salvatore
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:47:04 -0400
From: larson.jt@pg.com
Subject: Carboys are dangerous...
A quick reminder to those of us who ferment in glass. I have always been
extremely careful when handling carboys, especially full. On Sunday night,
one slipped out of my hands, hit the sink, and shattered. The result: 14
stitches in my foot, 4 severed toe tendons (only 2 could be reconnected),
and 3 weeks in a foot cast. Fortunately, it only had water in it (I was
cleaning it). Be careful.
Todd
Cincinnati
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:36:27 -0600
From: Ian Smith <isrs@cmed.com>
Subject: Fermentation temperature
I presently have an IPA at primary fermentation in my basement. Air
temperature is 57 F and actual wort temperature is 62-64F. Are there any
negative effects from too low a temperature for English style ales? I am
aware that temperatures in the low to mid 70's results in off tastes
(fusels?). Is there an "ideal" fermentation temperature and if so how does
the collective regulate/maintain a constant temperature?
Cheers
Ian Smith
isrs@cmed.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 09:40:14 -0400
From: "Peter J. Calinski" <PCalinski@iname.com>
Subject: Aluminum / Green Beer
I thought the St. Pat's day green beer came from putting the Budweiser
Frogs in a blender.
Pete Calinski
East Amherst NY
Near Buffalo NY
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:52:07 -0400
From: Spencer W Thomas <spencer@engin.umich.edu>
Subject: Re: ale yeast for fake lagers?
>>>>> "Bryan" == Bryan Gros <bryang@xeaglex.com> writes:
Bryan> Is there any good yeast choice for making an acceptable
Bryan> lager tasting beer while fermenting at, say, 62 or so?
I don't know about 62. I made a "lager" recently using W34/70
(YeastLab L31, I think) at 50-55 F (ambient in my basement "closet" at
that time of year). At 2 weeks it was very sulfury, but after another
month, mostly at basement ambient (60F-ish) it's, to my taste, a quite
acceptable lager. I don't know that I'd enter it in a competition,
but for just drinking, it's fine.
=Spencer Thomas in Ann Arbor, MI (spencer@umich.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:56:23 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer to loren crow on mash duration
Keeping a mash at 150F for three or four hours or even overnight is certainly
one of your options. You will be creating a wort with high fermentability,
giving you higher alcohol levels and less remaining extract and body. This
would be a tool to use for the production of light beers and what has come to
be known as malt-liquors. The major difficulties that I can see would be in
the absolute control of the temperature and maintaining the temperature. We
would not like to see it drop below 140F, or what is known as Pasteurization
temperature, to insure against souring.
dave radzanowski
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:56:19 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer for don cole on hot side aeration
This one is easy. No, I do not believe that "hot side aeration" is a factor
at the homebrewing scale. When you are required to ship large quantities for
great distance and need to have very long shelf stability under conditions
over which you have no control, then it becomes a factor. Relax. Enjoy your
sleep at night.
dave radzanowski
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:01:02 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: malt flavor
Malt flavor is a bit abstract. Not much is known (very little technical
papers deal with malt flavor). If you are trying to match the malt
flavor found in German lagers, however, I feel that this characteristic
is acheived by the use of an undermodified base malt (less well modified
than North American varieties) and the use of specialty malts. Namely
Carapils for body (unmalted barley would work as well), Munich for
maltiness (malted milk balls), and Caramel malts for sweet, toffee
notes. My advice would be to go low with your first trials, ~3% Carapils
& 3% Munich and work up from there if needed. Narziss (German brewing
Professor) has addressed specialty malts and their application in
various articles in the magazine Brauwelt International and even went so
far as to give malt bills for some typical German beer styles in Kunze's
Technology of Brewing & Malting.
Christopher Bird
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:46:56 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Siebel Qs
The advantage of acidifying sparge water would be to prevent the pH of
the mash residing in the lauter tun to rise above the value of 6.0
Everyone is familar with optimum pH ranges for mashing reactions etc.,
however, one of the most important measurements of pH is that of the
last taps, or the last runnings to the kettle. The pH of this wort
should not be above 6.0 due to increased extraction of the husky, grainy
flavors associated with tannins, and phenols.
A good temperature to maintain while lautering would be that of mash-off
or ~170 F, 77 C. This would aid in run-off (higher temps, lower
viscosity) and act to set the enzyme activity of the mash. Actually some
alpha amalyase would still be present (and desired) to work on any
starch that has come into solution under these conditions.
As far as an intense malty flavor for a Doppel Bock I would bring the
malt and bring a lot. I know more than one brewer that utilize these
beers to empty out their inventories of partical bags, etc. I like
Darryl Richman's book on bock beer. Try this for starters.
Good Luck. Christopher Bird
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:09:58 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Blind to Diacetyl
Specific anosmia or the inability to detect specific odors is not
uncommon. Don't get discouraged. Many people can train themselves to
become better at recognizing flavors with practice. The goal of odor
recognition is the training our odor memory. Keep in mind that the most
difficult odors to recognize can be those that we are already familiar
with, and the more intensely we concentrate on them, the harder they are
to recall. Practice paying more attention to common odors we encounter
frequently.
Diacetyl is interesting in that at low concentrations it doesn't come
across as butter. Instead it is more of a mouth feel or increased body
that is precieved. It is only at higher concentrations that one
describes the flavor as butter or butterscotch. The average threshold
for people is 80 ppb, however I've work with people capable of detection
in the range of 25 - 50 ppb. That works out to a concentration
equivalent to 30 seconds in 1.5 million years!
Cheers, Christopher Bird
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:39:35 EDT
From: BillSiebel@aol.com
Subject: answer to Mike Kauffman RE brewing careers question
Regarding a career in brewing, and there is no better, you did not say
whether you are considering working in a large or small brewery though it
sounds like you would like to work in the area of microbiology or quality
control.
If you take the long view it would be best to start your career in a small
brewery even if you might eventually want to work in a larger one. In a
smaller brewery you can learn, and get experience in, the whole gamut of
brewing and not be stuck in just one department. The hands on experience is
valuable and will give you a better understanding of the brewing process on a
commercial scale.
But it is tough getting that first job. The number of brewpubs will probably
continue to expand but consolidation will be challenging for the packaging
micros. However, the better micros will be growing and will see the need to
add a microbiologist or qc person to their staff. This could be an
opportunity for you since you have a degree in microbiology.
What does aid, especially in getting that first job, is networking and a
training advantage over your competition. One way to do that is with formal
brewing training. Just a few weeks of specialized courses can give you an
edge knowledgewise and also get you networking with others in the commercial
side of the business. Brewing schools like ours trys to help their Alumni in
the job search. I don't want to sound commercial on this forum but would be
glad to discuss a personal approach with you if you like. I am at the
Institute through Friday before heading out to the European Brewery Congress.
Cheers,
Bill Siebel
Siebel Institute of Technology
4055 W. Peterson Avenue
Chicago, IL 60646
773-279-0966
BillSiebel@siebelinstitute.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:15:32 -0500
From: "WILLIAM R. SIEBEL" <SIEBELINSTITUTE@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Flavor Courses @ Siebel
Siebels offers two courses on the topic of Beer Flavor. Flavor
Production and Control is a two day workshop on the production of
flavors during the brewing process and control of these flavor compounds
(i.e. how to increase or decrease certain flavors) Next offered August
16 - 17, or November 29 - 30 for $575. Sensory Evaluation of Beer is a
three day workshop on sensory evaluation methods and descriptive
anaalysis techniques. We cover flavor thresholds, setting up taste
panels etc. Next offered August 18 - 20, or December 1 - 3 for $845.
See our course catalog for more specific course information.
Currently we include some sensory work in most courses offered. We feel
that this is a skill that requires constant retraining to remain sharpe.
We have offered for several years a 1/2 day seminar on flavors in beer
(the last one was at the GABF in Denver).
As far as what we cover relating to beer styles, we cover the style
guidelines established by orgainzations such as the AHA and IBS, Michael
Jackson, and any number of historical accounts of how a beer was
traditionally produced. We hold formal style tastings, discuss which
attributes would be appropriate for a given style, and in our Diploma
Course assign a recipe formulation project. We simply provide the
students with a list of beer style parameters, a list of ingredients for
which they can use, and give them the specifics of our pilot system.
It's more of an exercize in calculation, however many times we get
students who have spent twenty plus years in the brewing industry who
have never formulated a recipe for scratch. The groups tend to get quite
competitive, with groups that have hit their respective targets
(gravities, BU's, colors, etc.) or overall brewing material efficiency
held in the highest regard.
I personally don't mind styles. I do however find it quite amusing for
brewers to spend a lot of time, effort and money to reproduce a certain
style, only to change the beers classification when it comes to a formal
competition.
Cheers, Christopher Bird
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:19:22 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer to dan listermann - subject: foam
We are unaware of any one correct term or verb for the collapsing of foam.
But we have heard some very colorful ones as we are sure you have as well.
Let us know if you come up with a good one.
dave radzanowski
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 13:19:25 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer to dan cole - subect aluminum
Aluminum has come under attack in many food related areas, not only
homebrewing. There is a proposed "model ordinance" that is now somewhere in
the maze of bureacracy at FDA that would require the elimination of aluminum
and copper from low pH food contact surfaces. This would, by definition,
naturally have a severe effect on the brewing industry. The question on
aluminum seems to come from the elevated levels of the metal found in the
brain tissue of autopsied Alzheimers patients. Researchers at this time
cannot determine if the aluminum is contributing to the cause of the disease
or if the disese is causing the abnormally high accumulation of the metal.
At this time we don't really see any need to discard your aluminum vessels.
We do recommend that you do use care in the cleaning of the units so as not
to accelerate leaching of high amounts of the metal. As you mentioned, we do
not recommend the use of caustic cleaners since there is the danger of
hydrogen gas production. With some of the concerns out there, it might be
prudent, if you continue to use your aluminum vessels, to remove your mash or
beer as quickly as possible to other containers. Most beer cans are
aluminum, but remember, they do have applied linings to prevent the beer from
contact with the metal.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 10:51:54 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: autolysis/squirrels
Jason writes ...
>I did some searching in the archives, but could not find the information I
was
>looking for. From what I have read, autolysis is basically the spilling of
the
>yeast guts into the beer. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this
basically
>yeast nutrient?
It is in the archives I assure you. The autolysis products release fatty
acids and proteolytic enzymes - enough to kill head. Oxidized lipids and
sulfur compounds are the sources of the major off-flavors from autolysis.
The autolysis also shifts the pH. Some of the short peptides released are
bitter and represent the flavor referred to as "yeast bite". These things
released are generally positive for yeast growth - but won't win you any
awards for flavor.
>If you transfer to a secondary and add some DME, will you get
>renewed fermentation and rid yourself of the rubbery autolysis taste and
smell?
A renewed fermentation will probably help a bit, especially in removing the
sulfury aromas (a good part of the rubber aroma), but can't rid the beer of
the stale lipid flavors or prevent the proteases from continuing to destroy
heading peptides or remove the bitter yeast bite. If you have a large % of
dead autolysing yeast in a slurry you should separate them - the sooner the
better. If you believe that renewed fermentation will do enough good to
matter (doubtful) repitch a fresh healthy slurry and wort.
Consider also that a beer with autolyzing yeast is likely to have several
limitations to growth. Adding a little autolysate and a little new wort from
DME to your dying yeast is unlikely to restore healthy growth conditions.
- --
Secret Squirrel - please write me.
-S
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 12:47:28 -0500
From: "Jeffrey M. Kenton" <jkenton@iastate.edu>
Subject: Gump Gone ?
Hurry back, Gump. I miss you already.
Jeff
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 19:50:45 +0200
From: "Dr. Pivo" <irv@wireworks.se>
Subject: re: malty flavour
There has been quite a bit of chatter recently about "malt flavour".
I must admit that that is one "flavour" that I am never really sure what
someone means when they use that term, and probably not even when I use
it myself.
As an example, there was quite a bit of discussion some time back about
"decoction" brewing, and one of the few things that were sort of by
proxy "unanimously agreed upon" was that decoction gave that special
"malty" flavour. Amidst this whole barnyard of theorizing, two people
(don't recall whom) actually DID something (what a break in tradition
there!). They used the exact same recipe, one decocted, and one RIMS
brewed. Despite the variables introduced from two different brewers,
and brewhouses, and all the differences that that can encur, there was
one huge point there. There was a discernable difference, but it wasn't
a "malty" one.
I have never seen a quicker change of paddles in midstream, since the
time I was a kid, a bigger guy got me down in a "head lock" amongst the
wood chips and rubbed my face in them.
Suddenly, at least on this forum, decoction didn't cause "malty"
taste..... everyone referred to it causing "yummy" taste (?)
It has been suggested that the taste of Scotch Whiskeys will give the
"malty taste".
If that is the case, I know it well, and so can you:
Once upon a time, I made some whiskey. (I'm sure there is a statute of
limitations on these things) simply because I read a book about it.
I didn't use "bog water" and I didn't "peat roast" my malt..... I just
made beer, and left the hops out. I then distilled the fermented result
(this is also highly illegal here, but has such a strong local
tradition, that I had no problem borrowing the equipment). The first
runnings were suitable as paint remover, and the end was pretty "oily"
with feusels. The middle portion was, however, crystal clear, about 85
percent alcohol, and had this distinctive taste "from the malt family".
Didn't remind me much of a malted milk, or a beer, but was still "there"
somewhere.
My neighbor was a boat builder, and working in oak, so I diluted my
goods with distilled water to 45 percent, band-sawed up some oak strips,
which I put in the bottles, and put them in the cellar. It took about 3
weeks for the oak to begin giving its characteristic taste and colour,
and then just smoothed out after that.
Now I don't know if this is the taste that people refer to when they say
"malty" and mean beer. I'd call it "malty" and mean whiskey. There may
be a link there, because you can taste the same thing (if you are law
abiding) by purchasing a bottle of "EKU 28", which I would call more of
a "malt appertife" than an actual beer.... but it tastes like that.
I'm just not sure that's what anyone else means when they use that term,
much less myself.
As a sad afternote, I might mention that I live in a part of the world
where thievery is not such a common thing, but I did get an uninvited
visitor to my cellar. I lost a 14 year old bottle of "the whiskey
project", a fine French champaign, a cooperative effort of Moutin
Rothchild and Robert Mondavi from '89 (a truly century year), and a 16
year old bottle of "black currant appertife" I had made.
What grieves me, was the pilcher was probably just drinking, not
tasting.
I have also have had a few strange "footprints in the snow" and found
the pressure on my kegs to not be exactly the same as when I left them.
This has resulted in, that I occasionally lock my cellar, even though I
don't lock my house, even when out of the country for months on end,
don't lock my car and I leave the keys in it, with my wallet on the
dashboard.... and have never had a problem there.
I guess the only way I can interpret this missfortune, is that "the
things I make, money can't buy".
Isn't homebrewing kind of like that?
Dr. Pivo
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 11:39:51 -0700 (PDT)
From: Matthew Comstock <mccomstock@yahoo.com>
Subject: Primary vs. Secondary Experiment
Experiment.
Flavor Comparison of Batches of Extract-Recipe Pale
Ale Differing in the use of Primary-only or
Primary/Secondary Fermentation Prior to Bottling.
Both batches were simple extract batches, using 6#
Munton's Plain Light DME, 1# 60L crystal malt, Chinook
and Fuggles hops, Nottingham dry yeast, 2qt starter.
I fermented #1 in a primary for two weeks then
bottled, #2 in the primary four days, then in a
secondary 10 days, then bottled. Quantitative results
were desired but notes were not well kept and actual
numbers would vary for everyone anyway.
So,qualitative results:
Overall Summary: batch#1 was better = primary only.
Upon comparison:
-Batch#1 carbonated earlier, between 1-2 weeks
earlier, than batch#2.
-Although batch#2 (using secondary) was clearer than
#1 going into the bottles, both batches looked
identical after several weeks in the bottle. Maybe,
#1 had a little more sediment. Maybe.
-After about 2-3 weeks (after #2 was bottled, it was
4-5 weeks after #1 was bottled), although #1 was more
carbonated, both beers tasted nearly identical.
-After, um, a longer time, when #2 was more
carbonated, while #1 still tasted great, #2 started
losing *something*.
-I decided that #2 was losing hop flavor/bitterness.
There was a real 'spicy' flavor to both beers at first
(during bottling in fact) that #1 retained and #2
lost. I've read and heard how oxidized beers will
lose hop character even before developing odd flavors.
That's what I decided happened here. I had a fair
amount of head space in the 6 gallon glass carboy
secondary, and even though I tried to transfer while
still slightly fermenting to allow CO2 to purge the
headspace, it might have already been too late.
-I've made one other pale ale batch where I
transferred to a secondary. The recipe was slightly
different, but the results were similar: over time
the beer became bland and lost hop character. Of
course, I drank it all before it got too old to show
any effects of oxidation.
Bottom line: In my brewing set-up I must be oxidizing
the beer during transfer to a secondary or while the
beer is sitting in the secondary(?) Anyway, I don't
see the need for a secondary unless I want to reuse
the yeast cake. The advantages are supposed to be,
what? Less yeast bite? Haven't noticed it yet in all
the 'primary-only' batches. Better clarity? Not
observed in this experiment.
But these were extract batches. Anyone have comments
about all-grain batches *needing* a secondary more
than extract batches? Why exactly?
Conclusion. Recent brewing texts always suggest a
transfer to a secondary. When I read these, I always
felt like I was doing something inferior by just using
a primary. Now I know (for MY set-up) using 'primary
only' works best. If I would have started brewing
always using a secondary, I would have been very
disappointed in the results: long carbonation times
and loss of hop character. I will continue to brew
'primary-only.' I suggest everyone try this
experiment. Whatever works best for you, of course.
You may have the opposite results as is usual in this
hobby. BUT, hopefully, if someone is reading this and
is concerned like I was about the 'inferiority' of
using 'primary only' fermentation, they will feel more
comfortable now, as I do.
Points for comment? Why are people using secondaries?
A clearing tank? Aging? What's the difference
between that and just bottling? I can understand a
few things like dry-hoping in a secondary, or having
to transfer away from fruit when making a fruit beer
or mead. Is there an extra need for a secondary when
going all-grain. I do have a hell of a lot more
trub/crud.
Is autolysis and/or yeast bite a myth perpetuated by
glass carboy manufacturers? Every time an author says
to use a secondary to 'improve' your beer do they get
a kickback from the Glass Carboy Manufacturers
Association (GCMA). Is so-called autolysis/yeast-bite
really just an excuse or a label or an explanation for
infected beer? The times I've read about off-flavors
(rubbery, meaty) caused by autolysis someone has
invariably recultured yeast from the bottom of a
bottle or used some wacky yeast source. If you've got
weak yeast, bad bugs can climb in the pot!
Why did it take so long for my secondary #2 batch to
carbonate. It took at least four weeks in the bottle
to come close to #1 (primary-only) after 1-2 weeks.
Enough.
Comments Please!
Matt Comstock in Cincinnati
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 14:41:13 -0400
From: "Andrew D. Kligerman" <homebre973@mindspring.com>
Subject: malty and/or diacetyl flavor from yeast
Haven't been in touch with HBD much in the last few years after having
adopting a baby girl, but wanted to make a kegged all-grain British or
Scotch Ale. I love diacetyl and maltiness in ales and was wondering if
there are any new or old yeast strains that tend to deliver these
characteristics without anyother off-flavors. Thx
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 15:04:40 -0400
From: "Stephen Alexander" <steve-alexander@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Siebel: Yeast Questions
Some Yeast Questions ...
Q1/ --- Temperature vs Esters ---
Most sources associate increased fermentation temperature with increased
ester levels, while W.Kunze, ['Technology of Brewing and Malting', pp
330-331] makes the opposite claim; that increased temperatures decrease
ester levels. Can you shed any light on this apparent contradiction ?
Q2/ --- CO2 levels/nucleation material additives --
High dissolved CO2 levels in the fermentor can negatively impact
yeast growth and even fermentation ability. The problem appears to be most
serious in barleywines or other extremely high gravity worts (>25P).
Experiments have been reported both here on HBD and in the professional
literature [1] which indicate that additions of non-nutritive materials like
sand, alumina powder, activated charcoal and keiselguhr *may* dramatically
improve the fermentation in these cases, but also perhaps in more typical
homebrew gravity worts (~13-17P).
Can you comment on the use of such materials, both as to the their
effectiveness, and also the practical matter of choosing a material that is
effective, cheap, with minimal flavor impact and easily disposable ?
[1] Applied and Environmental Microbiology, v60, no.5, pp1519-1524, "Effects
of Particulate Materials and Osmoprotectants on Very-High-Gravity Ethanoic
Fermentation by S.cerevisiae", Thomas, Hynes, Ingeldew, May 1994
Q3/ --- Flocculation ---
One issue which is more important to homebrewers than commercial brewers is
(lack of) yeast flocculation, because few of us filter. Yeast selection,
chilling to "knock-out yeast", fining and certainly patience are our main
tools to accomplish yeast separation. In light of what is currently known
about flocculation mechanisms, can you suggest any other methods which would
be practical on a small scale - even if unproved? Adjusting calcium level,
or
addition of a second strain for example.
Q4/ --- Limitation factors to Yeast Growth --
Both homebrew and commercial modern practice requires the elimination of
limits to yeast growth so that the fermentation completes, or nearly so,
while the pitched yeast are in the exponential [log] growth phase. We wish
to make carbohydrates the first growth limiting factor. One of the most
likely limits to growth, oxygen (sterols, unsaturated FAs) has been
discussed ad nauseam on this forum. You can assume that issue is understood.
In all malt worts, and also worts which may derive from high percentages
(say 50%) of raw grains what are the next most likely limitations to yeast
growth besides oxygen, and what can be done to overcome these limitations ?
FAN, specific amino acids, specific vitamins or mineral cofactors ?
Also, are there special growth limitation issues relevant to those
homebrewers who use dried or concentrated wort extracts ? Does the
drying/concentrating process destroy availability of FAN or vitamins for
example, or is sugar adulteration still an issue with extract ?
Q5/ --- Fermenter Agitators --
Some HBD contributors have discussed using fermentor agitators, for example
magnetic stir plates, to agitate yeast in our 5 to 15 gallon fermentors (not
just starters) to improve fermentation. Some of the older literature on
continuous fermentation indicated an increase in fusel oils due to
mechanical
yeast agitation, while later reports seldom mention any disadvantages.
Can you comment on the advisability of such mechanical agitation ? Are
increased fusels or other disadvantages inherent in such systems. ?
Q6/ --- Yeast Storage/Viability ---
Homebrewers very often have an available yeast slurry (from the bottom of a
fermentor) which they will wish to reuse after a time delay of perhaps 2 to
6 weeks - certainly a much longer time period than in commercial practice.
Some store the slurry under fermented beer, distilled water or fresh wort.
Most store in a cool/cold environment. The use of potassium phosphate
monobasic buffer solution has been suggested to possibly improve viability.
Keep in mind that even a low viability (~5%) slurry may represent the 'best'
culture readily available to a homebrewer.
What methods would you suggest to keep slurry viability high over such an
extended time period (storage medium, pH, oxygenation, temperature or
similar factors). ?
Some homebrew sources suggest washing such slurries in distilled water prior
to storage (http://hbd.org/brewery/library/yeast-faq.html#part_three). Acid
washes are a bit beyond most homebrewers technical means. Is this advisable
? When restarting a presumed low viability slurry (say after 4 weeks) what
steps should be taken to eliminate dead cells ? Is selection of the
re-suspended yeast during starter fermentation sufficient ?
George Fix [in 'Analysis of Brewing Techniques',pp87-89] suggests using
iodine staining rather than methyl blue staining for viability testing.
Given the relative inaccessibility of methyl blue to homebrewers do you
recommend this method ?
Some recent literature [reference not currently available] suggests that
methyl violet may be a better viability indicator than methyl blue for
S.cerevisiae. Comments ?
Q7/ --- Futures --- (finally a blue sky question)
As genetic manipulation methods become ever more prevalent, their common
application to commercial yeasts is assured. I've already seen papers
adding poly-unsaturated fatty-acid genes, and controls to de-carboxylation
genes to Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Merging the properties of S.diastaticus
into brewing yeast has long been sought.
Can you tell us a little about the current state and future you foresee as a
consequence of genetic manipulation of yeast. If you care to comment on
barley and hops in the same vein that would be wonderful.
========
So many questions, so little space.
thanks in advance, also for previous answers - wonderful,
Steve Alexander
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:28:18 EDT
From: Radzan1000@aol.com
Subject: Siebel answer to dr. pivo - subject: yeast respiration
No way! Do the Stoichiometry!
I assume from the nature of your technical questions that you are familiar
with basic chemistry.
Respiration of 1 ppm sugar requires about 1 ppm oxygen.
Oxygen saturation would be about 8 ppm in the beer.
Therefore 8 ppm sugar at most could be respired or 0.0008% sugar.
You assumed 0.18% sugar in solution. 0.18% less 0.0008% still leaves 0.18%
to be fermented.
Joe Power
------------------------------
End of HOMEBREW Digest #3040, 05/26/99
*************************************
-------
